VINAY PRATAP SINGH,ALIGARH vs. ITO., WARD-1(3), ALIGARH

PDF · subscribers
ITA 733/AGR/2018Status: DisposedITAT Agra13 February 2025AY 2010-11Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)2 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the reassessment proceedings were not sustainable in law because the Section 148 notice was not properly served as required by the Act. The notice was quashed accordingly.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer (AO) initiated reassessment proceedings under Section 147 by issuing a Section 148 notice. The first notice was issued on 24.03.2017 and returned unserved, followed by a second notice dated 27.07.2017.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the validity of the reassessment proceedings initiated by the AO due to improper service of the Section 148 notice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA BENCH, AGRA

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL

Hearing: 13.02.2025Pronounced: 13.02.2025

ORDER

Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:

1.

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2012-13, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-Aligarh’s order in appeal no. 116/2017-18/Aligarh/370 dated 10.08.2018, involving proceedings under section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

2.

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

3.

It emerges during the course of hearing from the perusal of pages 8-9 of the assessee’s paper book that the learned Assessing Officer had first issued his section 148 notice on 24.03.2017 which returned back, followed by second one dated 27.07.2017; respectively as against former one to have been served on or before 31.03.2017 only. We make it clear that section 148 as applicable in the impugned assessment year makes it incumbent on the learned Assessing Officer to serve the relevant notice since the legislature has incorporated the relevant statutory expression as “to be served” than mere issuance therein. We, thus, conclude in this factual backdrop that the impugned reopening u/s. 148 taken recourse by the Assessing Officer is not sustainable in law. The same stands quashed accordingly.

4.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 13THFebruary, 2025.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →